NCJ Number
55061
Journal
International Journal of Comparative and Applied Criminal Justice Volume: 1 Issue: 2 Dated: (FALL 1977) Pages: 135-145
Date Published
1977
Length
11 pages
Annotation
THE JUVENILE COURT IS FORMULATED AS AN ORGANIZATION AND DECISIONMAKING SYSTEM IN RELATION TO COURT INPUTS (OFFENDER AND OFFENSE FACTORS) AND COURT OUTPUTS (DISPOSITIONAL PATTERNS).
Abstract
THE DEVELOPMENT OF JUVENILE COURT INQUIRY AS PORTRAYED IN THE LITERATURE CAN BE DIVIDED INTO FOUR CATEGORIES OF FOCUS: PROGRESSIVE, CRITICAL, THEORETICAL, AND EMPIRICAL. PRIOR TO LABELING THEORY, THE LITERATURE WAS CONCERNED WITH NONCRITICAL ASPECTS OF THE COURT'S HUMANITARIAN PHILOSOPHY AND WITH CRITICAL DISCUSSIONS OF THE COURT'S BROAD DISCRETIONARY POWERS. INTEREST IN LABELING THEORY STIMULATED A SERIES OF EMPIRICAL STUDIES DEALING WITH JUVENILE COURT DECISIONMAKING PRACTICES AND ALSO ORGANIZATIONAL INTEREST IN JUVENILE COURT OPERATIONS. STUDIES OF THE JUVENILE COURT AS A DISTINCT ORGANIZATION AND DECISIONMAKING SYSTEM, HOWEVER, ARE FEW. IN STUDIES THAT HAVE BEEN CONDUCTED, TWO MODELS OF THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM HAVE BEEN EMPLOYED. RATIONAL GOAL MODEL VIEWS FORMAL ORGANIZATIONS AS INSTRUMENTS ORIENTED TOWARD THE REALIZATION OF EXPRESSED GOALS. THE EMPHASIS IS ON A FORMALLY PRESCRIBED STRUCTURE OR OFFICIAL ORGANIZATIONAL BLUEPRINT. THE FUNCTIONAL SYSTEMS MODEL ASSUMES THAT FORMALLY EXPRESSED GOALS ARE BUT ONE OF SEVERAL ORGANIZATIONAL CONCERNS. FORMAL ORGANIZATIONS HAVE, IN ADDITION TO THEIR GOALS, BASIC NEEDS RELATED TO ORGANIZATIONAL MAINTENANCE AND EXPANSION. IN CONCEPTUALIZING THE JUVENILE COURT AS A DISTINCT ORGANIZATION AND DECISIONMAKING SYSTEM, FOUR RELATED ASSUMPTIONS ARE PROPOSED: (1) THE JUVENILE COURT OPERATES WITH CONFLICTING GOALS AND AMBIGUOUS TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY; (2) THE JUVENILE COURT IS CHARACTERIZED BY CONDITIONS OF OPERATIONAL UNCERTAINTY AND RESOURCE SCARCITY; (3) GOAL CONFLICT AND OPERATIONAL UNCERTAINTY FACILITATE VARIETIES OF PROGRAMMATIC DEVELOPMENTS AND OPERATIONS PRESUMED CONSISTENT WITH NEEDS OF YOUTHFUL CLIENTS; AND (4) JUVENILE COURT DECISIONMAKING PRACTICES REFLECT THE NEED TO PROCESS ROUTINELY A POTENTIALLY BROAD RANGE OF CASES INTO LIMITED DISPOSITIONAL ALTERNATIVES THAT VARY OVER TIME AND AMONG COURT JURISDICTIONS. SPECIFYING INTERRELATIONSHIPS AMONG YOUTH INPUTS TO, INTERNAL DISPOSITIONAL STRUCTURES OF, AND DISPOSITIONAL OUTPUTS OF THE JUVENILE COURT MAY PROVIDE A SIGNIFICANT DIRECTION FOR FURTHER RESEARCH AND THEORETICAL STUDIES. REFERENCES ARE LISTED. (DEP)